**Official Comm Bank Series - Aus, Ind & SL ODI's***

[Crazy Sam]

And unfortunately for Lee his bad nights are really bad.

 

[Spark]

Irrespective of the 3rd final's result I think Sri Lanka will leave with their reputation enhanced. All three teams have shown at various stages of the tournament why they have had the success they've had in recent times in ODI's. Australia have been woefully inconsistent. I wonder if the BBL just prior to this series has had a more adverse impact on our bowlers than what we were expecting.

Far more likely is the fact that the team has been playing cricket non-stop since November and with very little break since September, and the scheduling in the last week or so has been especially extreme - 4 matches in 7 days (5 in 10 for SL).

 

[CWB304]

Regardless of what happens in the last final, it is surprising how many times SL has managed to beat Australia in this tri-series. It's 4-2 so far and it was 2-1 in the last series which makes it 6 wins for SL out of their last 9 games in Australia. Overall Australia has been quite average in their home ODI's for the last five years. Tri-series losses to England and India. Series losses to South Africa and Sri Lanka and stretched to the limit in this tri-series. Some big wins against Pakistan and England too but overall they have been better away than at home in ODI's which will worry them in the run-up to the next World Cup.

You make it sounds like it matters, or anyone really cares, or is seriously keeping score. When in reality this form of cricket is throwaway fare for the masses whose outcome is forgotten almost as soon as the entertainment is over.

This of course is unless someone just happens to play an amazing innings that people talk about for a long time to come in one of the games, or a bowler has a similarly impressive performance, in which case those outstanding individual performances are what are later remembered and not whether AUS lost 3-1 to SL in the 'series'.

Every sporting event needs context to become relevant. These series, whether bilateral or involving more than two teams, have never managed to carve out a worthy context for themselves that would make the public regard them as any more than the entertaining but forgettable bish bosh they are. This is why they remain terminally irrelevant several decades after they were first played.

Fans of ODIs can whine about it all they like or make themselves feel better by pointing to the crowds for Test matches outside Australia and England, but that's the reality. As long as a form of the game exists which tests the technical, tactical and mental skills of individuals and teams in a more thorough and satisfactory way, ODIs will always remain an afterthought, and details of individual contests will engender shrugs rather than rapt attention.

 

[G.I.Joe]

As far as I can see, Dissector isn't the one whining.

 

[Crazy Sam]

You make it sounds like it matters, or anyone really cares, or is seriously keeping score. When in reality this form of cricket is throwaway fare for the masses whose outcome is forgotten almost as soon as the entertainment is over.

etc etc etc

I don't know about others, but I place more value in these tri-series than I do just any random two-team odi series. I could tell you almost precisely who played in each ODI tri-series in australia since around 97/98 and where each team finished, but I would struggle to tell you who won or even played in the 5-match series that we have held in the past couple of years. I assume England would be one given the Ashes.

Playing a tri-series with points and bonus points adds another layer of interest and excitement to the games that I think you are underestimating. India's incredible chase last week wouldn't have happened without a bonus point being on offer.

 

[benchmark00]

Personally I find ****s bitching and moaning about limited overs cricket very boring.

I view limited overs cricket as work, and test cricket as a holiday. You need to work to pay for your holiday. It's the same with cricket. LO's stuff is more profitable than test cricket overall. We'd all love to have more test cricket, just like we'd love to have more holidays but it doesn't work like that. We have to fund it somehow.

We're so spoiled these days by the sheer quantity of cricket we have for our consumption. They play more tests than they ever did, plus there's a gooch load of LO's which is better than nothing.

The tri series is alot better than just a normal bi-lateral series (provided there are three competitive teams) so the administrators should be congratulated by trying to jazz up the 'work' aspect of cricket.

 

[Furball]

Pretty good analogy that.

I think it's a shame that although teams are playing more Test cricket, the actual series aren't longer. Only the Ashes is now played over 5 Tests, and it's really only England, and Australia v India that even bother to play 4 match series anymore.

 

[CWB304]

I don't know about others, but I place more value in these tri-series than I do just any random two-team odi series. I could tell you almost precisely who played in each ODI tri-series in australia since around 97/98 and where each team finished, but I would struggle to tell you who won or even played in the 5-match series that we have held in the past couple of years. I assume England would be one given the Ashes.

Playing a tri-series with points and bonus points adds another layer of interest and excitement to the games that I think you are underestimating. India's incredible chase last week wouldn't have happened without a bonus point being on offer.

I think you're right to say that adding another team adds another level of interest. But it still doesn't raise it to the point where cricket lovers in general are keeping score of who won and where each team finished in these tri-series events going back over the years.

Maybe it's just me, but I would have thought that if after all this time the ODI game hasn't raised itself to the point where its statistics mean something, perhaps those in charge of the game should be looking to do everything they can to emphasize, showcase and highlight the Test game, whose statistics still do, and carry great prestige.

This would mean basing all their scheduling around Tests even though they are not the main money spinner and marketing other formats as the supporting attraction which perhaps prepares selected outstanding performers - like Warner and Kohli - for the longer form. There are plenty of other examples - not just from sport - of the prestige events not being the biggest money spinners - in fact being actual loss leaders - yet nevertheless remaining fundamental to the whole enterprise.

For example the big fashion shows in Paris, Milan, New York and London remain the highlights of the fashion year even though every single designer who puts on these shows makes huge losses not only on them but on couture in general, which they then hope to recoup on sales of ready-to-wear and scent. Success in the latter would not be possible without the global attention and prestige conferred by the former.

 

[CWB304]

Personally I find ****s bitching and moaning about limited overs cricket very boring.

I view limited overs cricket as work, and test cricket as a holiday. You need to work to pay for your holiday. It's the same with cricket. LO's stuff is more profitable than test cricket overall. We'd all love to have more test cricket, just like we'd love to have more holidays but it doesn't work like that. We have to fund it somehow.

We're so spoiled these days by the sheer quantity of cricket we have for our consumption. They play more tests than they ever did, plus there's a gooch load of LO's which is better than nothing.

The tri series is alot better than just a normal bi-lateral series (provided there are three competitive teams) so the administrators should be congratulated by trying to jazz up the 'work' aspect of cricket.

I hope you haven't taken my comments for bitching or moaning about limited overs cricket. I enjoy the game on occasion but have little patience for attempts to make out that its statistics mean anything or have established themselves in context like their parallels in the Test game when they don't and quite clearly haven't.

Most cricket fans would not be able to tell you who won a series - whether bilateral or between three teams - that was played just a couple of years ago. Yet the same fans would be able to remember not just the outcomes but day to day swings of fortune that occurred in Test matches and series played decades ago.

I agree with your analogy and in some ways it is similar to the one I used to illustrate my last post.

 

[NasserFan207]

On a seperate note these trilateral ODI series are more interesting than the standard 10 ODI contests between two teams.

Should be slightly shorter though

 

[Arachnodouche]

There used to those Australasia cups in Sharjah back in the 90s I think which were a lot of fun. Maybe a product of doe-eyed youth but those are good memories of multi-nation tourneys in white clothing even.

 

[Migara]

It's probably time to revisit a series in white clothing.

 

[Jayzamann]

Probably a good thing only the first three hours of this is on telly, I wanna go kick some reapers asses.

 

[Burgey]

Personally I find ****s bitching and moaning about limited overs cricket very boring.

I view limited overs cricket as work, and test cricket as a holiday. You need to work to pay for your holiday. It's the same with cricket. LO's stuff is more profitable than test cricket overall. We'd all love to have more test cricket, just like we'd love to have more holidays but it doesn't work like that. We have to fund it somehow.

We're so spoiled these days by the sheer quantity of cricket we have for our consumption. They play more tests than they ever did, plus there's a gooch load of LO's which is better than nothing.

The tri series is alot better than just a normal bi-lateral series (provided there are three competitive teams) so the administrators should be congratulated by trying to jazz up the 'work' aspect of cricket.

Personally find you very boring tbh.

 

[Briony]

Probably a good thing only the first three hours of this is on telly, I wanna go kick some reapers asses.

Is that in Adelaide only?

 

[benchmark00]

Personally find you very boring tbh.

You just don't appreciate good entertainment when you see it.

 

[Burgey]

You just don't appreciate good entertainment when you see it.

Now That's Entertainment.

 

[benchmark00]

Can not and will not compete with that.



Lyon playing, didn't see that coming.

 

[Lostman]

Wish I could find prop bets on Herath's fielding.
Would set the fielding FUBARs @ 1.5.

 

[Jayzamann]

Is that in Adelaide only?

Yeah I think so.

But the reaper invasion affects the entire galaxy.